CBS Sports columnist Dennis Dodd published a long look at the oncoming Cost of Attendance package FBS programs will offer student-athletes as of Aug. 1. Hidden among the forest of discussion points the COA creates, Dodd uncovered one interesting nugget: In the wake of the Tattoogate scandal that rocked Ohio State's football program in 2011, Ohio State places its position coaches in charge of their players' financial literacy.
From the article:
Players can't buy a car or lease an apartment until they clear it with a position coach first. Athletes have to write out a budget and are responsible for balancing a checkbook.
During that scandal, former tailback Dan Herron was suspended twice by the NCAA for accepting improper benefits.
"He legitimately needed some money," Ohio State AD Gene Smith said. "That was a miss for us. We were teaching financial literacy but, still, how did that pass us? How did we not have a method for that young person to say, 'I am in dire straits?'."
Smith said the process was borne out of, yes, Tattoogate, but also years of seeing students spend Pell grant money in a way that wasn't in their long term best interest. "What was happening is if you were Pell eligible and you got that big check, they were going to Nordstrom and buying a nice pair of shoes," Smith told CBS.
Is this overreaching the bounds of what a position coach should be, or the necessary oversight players need? Should coaches cede this responsibility to parents or teachers, or do coaches have to step in as financial chaperones because no one else will?
If you're a college coach, how much financial education does your program impart on your players? How much should a football program oversee its players finances?